OLRB 2001

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Ontario Labour Relations Board under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, alleging the responding party employer breached the collective agreement by employing non-union workers and failing to pay them union rates.

The responding party failed to file a response.

The Board proceeded by default, deemed the facts in the application accepted, and ordered the responding party to pay $66,363.84 in damages and $214.00 for filing fees.

The applicant appealed an Employment Standards Officer's denial of her claim for unpaid commissions.

The employer failed to appear at the hearing and had previously failed to produce records.

Based on the applicant's uncontradicted and credible testimony regarding her commission structure and past earnings, the Board found she was entitled to $1,400.00 in unpaid commissions for the period of April 1, 1997 to September 17, 1997.

The Order to Pay was amended accordingly.

The Adjudicator/Referee directed the responding party employer and the Ministry of Labour to file their submissions in response to the applicant's correspondence by July 13, 2001.

The parties agreed to adjourn the applications sine die.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the applications will be deemed terminated if no request to proceed is made.

The applicant employer sought a review of an Order to Pay under section 68 of the Employment Standards Act.

The workplace parties entered into Minutes of Settlement.

The Board ordered the disbursement of the funds held in trust by the Director, with $5,554.24 to the employee, $388.56 to the employer, and a $1,000 administration fee retained by the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

The applicant trade union applied for certification to represent employees of the responding party.

The Board found that the union filed sufficient membership evidence to warrant a representation vote.

A vote was directed for the proposed bargaining unit, with a direction to segregate ballots for disputed positions (sales staff, students, and quality control staff).

Due to a dispute over the bargaining unit description and the number of employees, the Board ordered the ballot box sealed pending further agreement or order.

The applicant trade union filed a displacement application for certification to represent a bargaining unit of healthcare workers currently represented by the intervenor.

The responding party disputed the applicant's estimate of the number of employees in the proposed bargaining unit and gave notice under section 8.1 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board found that the numerical difference between the parties was not significant and that the applicant established sufficient membership support to obtain a representation vote.

The Board directed that a representation vote be taken.

The applicant union sought leave to withdraw its application for certification after a representation vote was held and the ballot box sealed.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request to withdraw the application pursuant to section 7(8) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

The Board noted that any effect of the withdrawal on subsequent applications under section 7(10) of the Act would be determined if a new application is filed within one year.

The Minister of Labour referred a question to the Board regarding whether the employer was a 'hospital' under the Hospital Labour Disputes Arbitration Act.

The applicant union subsequently advised the Board that the parties had settled a collective agreement and requested the Board not to deal further with the reference.

The Board noted that it had not been instructed by the Minister to abandon the reference, and advised the parties to request the Minister to withdraw it.

The responding party requested an extension of time until June 28, 2001, to file its submissions, noting that the applicant had been granted a similar extension.

As the hearing was scheduled for June 26, 2001, the Board granted an extension to June 22, 2001.

The applicant union referred a grievance to the Board for determination under section 133 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995.

On the agreement of the parties, the Board adjourned the application sine die, noting it would be deemed terminated if no request to proceed was made within one year.

The applicant union and responding party employer reached an agreement to withdraw the applications.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted leave to withdraw the applications and cancelled the previously set meeting and hearing dates.

The applicant filed an unfair representation complaint against the trade union.

The union brought a preliminary motion to dismiss the application for delay, noting the events occurred by April 2000 but the application was not completed until October 2001.

The Board directed the applicant to confirm the date of the events and provide an explanation for the delay before ruling on the union's motion to dismiss.

The applicant, Teamsters Local Union No. 879, requested to withdraw its application against Paper Fibres Inc. and Alfa Paper Products Inc. The Ontario Labour Relations Board granted the request and the application was withdrawn.

The applicant union filed an application for certification and two unfair labour practice complaints against the responding employer.

The parties entered into a memorandum of settlement, resulting in the termination of the unfair labour practice complaints.

For the certification application, the parties agreed to count all but two segregated ballots.

The representation vote resulted in a 122-122 tie.

Because not more than fifty percent of the ballots were cast in favour of the union, the application for certification was dismissed.

The applicant union and responding employer agreed to adjourn the application sine die for a period not exceeding one year.

The Board consented to the adjournment, noting the matter would be deemed terminated if no request to proceed is made within that time.

The applicant sought review of an Employment Standards Officer's decision not to issue an Order to Pay for termination pay.

The employer terminated the applicant after discovering he had punched in early without working, and after the applicant verbally abused the owner upon being confronted and docked pay.

The Board found that the applicant's repeated swearing and verbal abuse, combined with his prior discipline record and time theft, amounted to willful misconduct.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant union and responding employer agreed to adjourn the application sine die.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board consented to the adjournment for a period not exceeding one year, after which the matter would be deemed terminated if neither party requested to proceed.

The responding parties requested that the applications under sections 69 and 1(4) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995 be dismissed against Spectrum Construction Services Inc., Columbia Chrome, and Cloutier's Machine Shop Limited on the grounds of insufficient particularization.

The Board found that the allegations were sufficient to proceed, given section 69(13) of the Act.

The Board amended the name of one responding party to Spectrum Construction and directed the applicant to serve the applications on that company.

The Board also directed the responding parties to produce all relevant documents.

The applicant union applied for certification for a bargaining unit of paramedics.

A dispute arose regarding whether a voluntary recognition agreement between the responding party employer and an intervenor union barred the application.

The applicant also filed an unfair labour practice complaint regarding the same agreement.

After the original Vice Chair recused herself, the Alternate Chair directed that a new panel of the Board would hear and decide the remaining issues in the certification application together with the unfair labour practice complaint.